Uncategorized
Can a Jewish fan watch the Super Bowl with a clean conscience? The rabbis had thoughts.
(JTA) — In January, 24-year-old Damar Hamlin of the Buffalo Bills collapsed on the field after experiencing cardiac arrest. His team and the entire NFL community rallied around him. His first words upon awakening: “Who won?”
Although Hamlin’s medical crisis was a rare on-field occurrence, the trauma surrounding his collapse stirred up age-old questions for me, and for many of us, about the toll football takes on the bodies of its players. What are we allowing to happen to these young men, in the name of sportsmanship, entertainment and national identity? When the Super Bowl airs on Sunday, what is our responsibility as spectators?
While still a newcomer to football, I turned to Jewish texts to help me find answers, and fascinatingly, I found a striking parallel between the rabbis of old and two contemporary journalists.
In 2009, in a scathing critique in The New Yorker, Malcolm Gladwell denounced the game for the serious and long-lasting damage it does to players — especially traumatic brain injuries and debilitating neurological disorders resulting from repeated blows to the head — and placed the blame squarely on the fans. “There is nothing else to be done, not so long as fans stand and cheer,” he wrote. “We are in love with football players, with their courage and grit, and nothing else — neither considerations of science nor those of morality — can compete with the destructive power of that love.”
William C. Rhoden wrote a heartfelt piece after Hamlin’s collapse, where he reflected on his own experience as a professional sports reporter of over 40 years. “We’re used to ferocious collisions and mostly happy endings. We applaud the player as he walks off the field, then sit back down in our seats, in our suites, in our press boxes and focus on the next play,” he wrote. “I realized, with sadness, the extent to which I had become desensitized to the real-life violence of our national pastime.”
Gladwell and Rhoden both recognize that football has inherent violence, and that as spectators we have an obligation to contend with it. Gladwell is pointing to the fans’ desire for violence, which makes them culpable in the destructive nature of the sport. Rhoden asks fans to notice their own callousness as they behold the effects of that violence.
This same dichotomy is reflected in the rabbis’ understanding as well. Indeed, many of the rabbis of the Talmud lived in the Greco-Roman world, when gladiators would battle with one another to the death, for thousands of people to watch. One of the most extolled rabbinic figures, Rabbi Shimon Ben Lakish, is said to have himself been a mighty gladiator who eventually escaped that life to become a great sage.
In the Tosefta, an ancient Jewish legal code contemporaneous to the Talmud, a question is raised about whether one is allowed to attend Roman amphitheaters and stadiums. For some of these venues, the concerns center around viewing and possibly participating in forbidden idol worship, or associating with foolishness and taking time away from more serious pursuits.
However, by far the greatest concern is that of attending events in stadiums where violence is prevalent. Indeed, the text goes as far as to say that “one who sits in a Stadium, is one who sheds blood.” (Tosefta Avoda Zarah 2.2) Here we see the same concerns that Gladwell raised, that by being a spectator of this violence, you are yourself more than a bystander. Indeed, if there were no fans, there would be no audience for these violent spectacles — making fans directly culpable in these acts of bloodshed.
The Tosefta then quotes another perspective: “Rabbi Natan permits [going to Roman stadiums] because of two things: because of crying and saving a life and because of testifying for a woman that would remarry.”
Rabbi Natan here desires to find justifications for why one could attend these events. He refers to the idea that during a gladiator event, the crowd could cheer for the losing fighter, and beg for mercy so that he would not be killed. A Jew is therefore permitted to attend because they could potentially save a life. An additional reason: They could also provide eyewitness testimony to a person’s death, thus causing the victim’s wife to become free to remarry.
Recently, while learning this text with my colleagues at The Jewish Education Project, we understood Rabbi Natan as showing a keen understanding of the reality of his time. People will attend these games, and these games are a part of the Jewish community’s life. Rather than forbidding them from going, he explains that there are positive motivations for their attendance.
In many ways, this matches the Rhoden position as well. He assumes we will continue to watch sports, report on games and enter fantasy football leagues. Yet, what should our motivations be as we watch these games? Do we voyeuristically cheer for the violence, enjoying the hard hits? Or can we re-sensitize ourselves and remind ourselves that these are human beings with families, and futures after their playing days are over?
I am still thinking about those awful moments in Buffalo, when Hamlin fell to the ground. All that time he spent training, the myriad ways he has broken his body for our viewing pleasure, and the lengthy rehabilitation ahead of him.
For those of us who will watch the hard hits this Sunday, I offer a charge: Do not allow yourself to ignore the pain and violence you see. Actively re-sensitize yourself to the humanity of these players. Commit to understanding what the policies are that will make this sport safer, and demand their implementation. Watch this game as Rabbi Natan teaches: with the intention to call out for justice wherever you can.
—
The post Can a Jewish fan watch the Super Bowl with a clean conscience? The rabbis had thoughts. appeared first on Jewish Telegraphic Agency.
Uncategorized
Deal With US Within Reach ‘Only if Diplomacy Is Given Priority,’ Iran’s Foreign Minister Says
Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araqchi speaks during a press conference following talks with Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov in Moscow, Russia, Dec. 17, 2025. Photo: REUTERS/Ramil Sitdikov/Pool
Iran‘s Foreign Minister Abbas Araqchi said on Tuesday that a deal with the US was “within reach, but only if diplomacy is given priority,” days ahead of an expected fresh round of talks between the two sides in Geneva.
The talks are set to take place on Thursday in Geneva, a senior US official said on Monday, with US envoys Steve Witkoff and Jared Kushner slated to meet with an Iranian delegation for the negotiations.
The two countries resumed negotiations earlier this month as the US builds up its military capability in the Middle East. Iran has threatened to strike US bases in the region if it is attacked.
“We have a historic opportunity to strike an unprecedented agreement that addresses mutual concerns and achieves mutual interests,” Araqchi said in a post on X.
The Iranian top diplomat said his country would resume the talks with “a determination to achieve a fair and equitable deal in the shortest possible time.”
Earlier, Iranian Deputy Foreign Minister Majid Takht-Ravanchi said Iran was ready to take all necessary steps to reach a deal with the United States.
“We are ready to reach an agreement as soon as possible. We will do whatever it takes to make this happen. We will enter the negotiating room in Geneva with complete honesty and good faith,” Takht-Ravanchi said in comments carried by state media.
White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt said on Tuesday that US President Donald Trump’s “first option” was always diplomacy but that he was “willing to use lethal force” if necessary.
“The president is always the final decision maker around here,” she told reporters at the White House.
A senior Iranian official told Reuters on Sunday that Tehran would seriously consider a combination of sending half of its most highly enriched uranium abroad, diluting the rest, and taking part in creating a regional enrichment consortium – an idea periodically raised during years of Iran-linked diplomacy.
Iran would do this in return for US recognition of Iran‘s right to “peaceful nuclear enrichment” under a deal that would also include lifting economic sanctions, the official said.
“If there is an attack or aggression against Iran, we will respond according to our defense plans … A US attack on Iran is a real gamble,” Takht-Ravanchi added.
Indirect talks between the two sides last year brought no agreement, primarily due to friction over a US demand that Iran forgo uranium enrichment on its soil, which Washington views as a pathway to a nuclear bomb.
Iran has always denied seeking such weapons.
The US joined Israel in hitting Iranian nuclear sites last June, effectively curtailing Iran‘s uranium enrichment, with Trump saying its key nuclear sites were “obliterated.” But Iran is still believed to possess stockpiles enriched previously, which Washington wants it to relinquish.
Uncategorized
Australia Begins Inquiry Into Antisemitism After Bondi Shooting
An Australian flag sits amongst floral tributes honoring the victims of a shooting at Jewish holiday celebration on Sunday at Bondi Beach, in Sydney, Australia, Dec. 16, 2025. Photo: REUTERS/Hollie Adams
Australia on Tuesday opened a government-backed inquiry into antisemitism, after a mass shooting at a Jewish event at Bondi Beach killed 15 people in December 2025.
The attack at a Jewish Hanukkah celebration shocked a country with strict gun laws and fueled calls for tougher controls and stronger action against antisemitism.
The Royal Commission, the most powerful type of government inquiry in Australia which can compel people to give evidence, will be led by retired judge Virginia Bell.
It will consider the events of the shooting as well as antisemitism and social cohesion in Australia, and is expected to report its findings by December this year.
In her opening statement at a court in Sydney on Tuesday, Bell said security arrangements for the event would form a major part of the commission.
“The commission needs to investigate the security arrangements for that event, and to report on whether our intelligence and law enforcement agencies performed to maximum effectiveness,” Bell said.
Police say the alleged gunmen, Sajid Akram and his son Naveed Akram, were inspired by Islamic State.
Sajid Akram was shot dead by police at the scene, while Naveed Akram, who was also shot but survived, is currently facing charges including 15 counts of murder and a terror offense.
INQUIRY SCOPE LIMITED
Due to the ongoing legal proceedings, no potential witnesses in Akram’s trial will be called to give evidence to the commission, Bell said.
Bell said she plans to meet with victims’ families in private to explain some of the limitations of her inquiry.
Richard Lancaster, the top lawyer assisting Bell with the inquiry, said his team had sent dozens of requests to government and other agencies to produce documentary evidence, but the level of responses is “not presently where we would like it to be.”
There was no testimony heard or evidence given on Tuesday, and the commission is yet to determine when it will next sit.
Michele Goldman, CEO of the New South Wales Jewish Board of Deputies, said after the hearing that the inquiry would be an opportunity to showcase the community’s “horrific” experiences of antisemitism.
But some people directly impacted by the attack would find it “very hard” to be barred from sharing their accounts with the inquiry, she said.
Prime Minister Anthony Albanese had initially resisted calls to set up a Royal Commission, saying the process would take years, which attracted criticism from Jewish groups and victims’ families.
The Bondi attack followed a spate of antisemitic incidents in the country, including the firebombing of a Melbourne synagogue.
The government has already responded by tightening gun laws and introducing new legislation against hate speech.
Uncategorized
Iran Issues Death Sentence Linked to January Protests, Source Says
A February 2023 protest in Washington, DC calling for an end to executions and human rights violations in Iran. Photo: Reuters/ Bryan Olin Dozier
A revolutionary court in Tehran has issued a death sentence for an Iranian man accused of “enmity against god,” which if confirmed would be the first such sentence linked to mass protests in January, a source close to the man’s family said.
The source told Reuters on Tuesday that Iran‘s judiciary had not yet announced the sentence against the man, Mohammad Abbasi, and that Iran‘s Supreme Court was yet to uphold it.
Abbasi was accused of killing a security officer, an allegation his family denied, the source said.
Rights groups say thousands of people were killed in a crackdown on the protests, the worst domestic unrest in Iran since the era of its 1979 Islamic Revolution.
During the unrest, US President Donald Trump warned Tehran that he could order military action if it carried out executions.
The source said the defendant’s daughter, Fatemeh Abbasi, was handed a 25-year prison sentence over her role in protests.
“The defendants do not have access to the lawyer they wanted, and were given a public defender,” the source added.